I think in explanation of [1,3] Hydrogen shift there was a mistake..i think it was HOMO Of allylic anion and the picture also says that it is HOMO of allylic anion not cation.Please someone confirmed that i am right or wrong..pls reply i am confused.
Since 1,3 H shifts are photochemically allowed, it will LUMO of the ground state which is HOMO of photochemically excited state. He was right in what he said.
i think it should be [1,7] but maybe because in [1,7] it is 8 electron system, and by woodward hofmann or homo orbital u can know that it will go antrafacial. Hydrogen is so small and antrafacial maybe geaometrically unfavoured.
I was so confused watching this and was wondering if anyone can answer the long list of questions I have; 1) in 2 why is the [1,5] shift favored over the [1.3]? 2) in 3 why is it an carbon shift and not a hydrogen shift? How do you know when one happens over the other? 3) same as in 3 but in 4 why did the hydrogen move and not one of the methyl groups? 4) and in the last example why was the hydride shift favored over the carbon shift?
In 2, you have 6e system that means you have (4n+2)e system not 4n system. According to woodward rule it will undergo suprafacial on heating condition. [1 5], [1 7] is possible on heating.
Example 3 was confusing, wish he wrote numbering to the product as well. But, if H shift is considered it ends up with a product having double bond on bridged carbon which is not possible according Bredt's rule. So Carbon transfer. Hope this helps you.
![KSI - Dirty [Official Visualiser]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VoDh1h1dPUE/mqdefault.jpg)
I think in explanation of [1,3] Hydrogen shift there was a mistake..i think it was HOMO Of allylic anion and the picture also says that it is HOMO of allylic anion not cation.Please someone confirmed that i am right or wrong..pls reply i am confused.
it is allylic radical actually
Since 1,3 H shifts are photochemically allowed, it will LUMO of the ground state which is HOMO of photochemically excited state. He was right in what he said.
sir in the 1st example why not[ 1,5] hydrogen shift
suprafacial is generally more favourable but for [1,5] hydrogen shift this is antarafacial but [1,3] H shift is going through suprafacial mode
Sumit Pal why cant it be 1,5 antrafacial?
Nice concept
sir plz explain to the symmetrytical relation orbital and further go to the superficial and anthrafacial shift s
it is just request sir
in the last example,why isn't [1,7] H shift is possible?
i think it should be [1,7] but maybe because in [1,7] it is 8 electron system, and by woodward hofmann or homo orbital u can know that it will go antrafacial. Hydrogen is so small and antrafacial maybe geaometrically unfavoured.
sir we need a compleat searise on seereochemistery
In 5th example ..one bond is not written
I was so confused watching this and was wondering if anyone can answer the long list of questions I have;
1) in 2 why is the [1,5] shift favored over the [1.3]?
2) in 3 why is it an carbon shift and not a hydrogen shift? How do you know when one happens over the other?
3) same as in 3 but in 4 why did the hydrogen move and not one of the methyl groups?
4) and in the last example why was the hydride shift favored over the carbon shift?
In 2, you have 6e system that means you have (4n+2)e system not 4n system. According to woodward rule it will undergo suprafacial on heating condition. [1 5], [1 7] is possible on heating.
nope in 2 it is 4n e system and [1 7] is possible on photochemically ...how it is possible on thermally ?
in example 3 with hydrogen shift a double bond will be formed at junction carbon that might be the reason why hydrogen is not shifted.
no it is 6 electron system.[1,5] shift the electron is 1+5=6.for [1,3] shift the number of electrons=1+3=4
Example 3 was confusing, wish he wrote numbering to the product as well.
But, if H shift is considered it ends up with a product having double bond on bridged carbon which is not possible according Bredt's rule. So Carbon transfer.
Hope this helps you.
Hi I am from Pakistan, guys this fellow look so much confused with the content he taught, can't be a good teacher for sure
Just like Imran khan? Ever heard of IIT? There are few mistakes but let's not criticize someone for that and at least not label him as a bad teacher.
Salle Doro IIT me to pauche nahi
Gaand fath jati teri